Do you have evidence for these bold claims? I’ve seen many people in this thread alone who are evidence against all your claims, and yet your generalisations, supported here with no less than five claims and zero evidence, are supposed to be compelling? Also, you blaggard, my grandmother was three years older than my grandfather.

Get thee gone.

I am thirty. My grandfather fought in WWII. Just because I’m in the minority doesn’t mean we don’t exist, let alone that generalisations are valid.

Fair enough

This is the plot of an episode of the anime “mushishi” called “tree of eternity”, IIRC.

Dragonflies are likely to be with the mantids at the “we will rip your head off if we like you, you don’t want to know what we do to our enemies” table.

It does not.

I could be wrong, but I’m fairly sure that, while ‘f’ is a function, ‘f(x)’ is the function’s output, not the function itself. So f(x) is a meme (as.long as x is a meme), because function f’s output is a meme. The function itself is a mathematical operation, not its output.

f and F are not memes, but functions which output memes.

Without a nervous system, the only thing it can feel is ANGER.

One of your precepts is flawed. f is not a meme any more than the word “all” is a meme in “all your base are belong to us”. f is defined by text within the overall meme, but while it is part of the meme, it is not the meme itself, as it lacks the context of the remainder of the meme. Your precept is like saying “9 is prime, because it is the prime number ‘19’”.

9 is not prime. It is part of the representation of the number 19.

f is not the meme. It is part of the context which defines the meme.

For those who are not aware, ^^this^^ is how you turn cheese into american cheese. (Though I think they just use milk or water, not butter. Maybe it wouldn’t taste like shit if they used butter)

Was looking for this.

My guy, I did not. I just tried to write it out like my good ol’ pappy would have wanted: in the style of convicted con artist Joseph Smith.

You think ChatGPT would use words like “ameliorate” or, even more unbelievably, use “transubstantiate” as a term for the conversion of god’s feces into whatever Donald Trump’s mental assessments dare to call a mind?

My Instagram handle is '); DROP TABLE AccountNames;–

Let’s be very clear: only one of those two sexual acts is illegal. The other one is just hilarious proof that we live in the most stupid timeline.

There is nothing more damaging to the narcissistic dictator’s fragile ego than emasculation. Let us merely hope that the hits keep coming.

Book of Endings, 1:15-23

15 - And lo, when Harambe ascended to his rightful reward, he found the great seat empty, the post abdicated, for the Creator had forsaken the creation.

16 - Finding the holy promontory abandoned, Harambe chose, then, to take that highmost throne and make for himself a lofty view of creation.

17 - And He did gaze upon the world and found it wanting.

18 - And Harambe wept, for there were no greater heights to conquer.

19 - It came to pass that Harambe did gnash his teeth and, seeing only the world below him, realised the nature of the prison to which he had committed himself.

20 - And Harambe contented himself with throwing the many integral parts of that world through the bars of the prison in which he now found himself, like an Ape throwing feces through the bars of his cage.

21 - And there came then great plagues from the animals of the land, and storms from the seas. Fire rose from the air and the people of the land below cried out.

22 - And Harambe, hearing their cries, sought to ameliorate their fears by throwing more of his dung from that great height.

23 - And lo, the many peoples of the Earth began to accustom themselves to the persistent rain of feces, now transubstantiated into flesh and land and time.

“Mexico” is one of only two cases where I don’t follow the “correct” pronunciation as often as possible (the other being ‘axolotl’, because if I pronounce it with the correct Nahuatl ‘sh’ sound, nobody knows what I’m talking about). If the topic is brought up, I wait to see how someone else says it. If I’m speaking to my largely-latina students, many of whom are from mexico, then I’m obviously going to pronounce it as an ‘h’/‘j’. However, many of them also pronounce it with an x when speaking in English, so I just tend to go with ‘correct’ unless one of my interlocutors says it the american way first. I don’t feel particularly bad about this, since the word “Mexico” also comes from Nahuatl, but nobody actually pronounces it the original way in mexico, so I go with whatever my interlocutor goes with first. (For the same reason I’m not going to call Germany “Deutschland” unless I’m speaking to someone whom I know to be German.)

In general, I try to pronounce loan words the correct way in their mother tongue, whether they be Maori, Xhosa, or French. And yes, I know this makes me sound like a pretentious dickwad when I say "Kwah-sahn’ ", rather than “cruh-sahnt”, and I’ll take sounding like a pretentious dickwad over giving in to my American exceptionalism any day.

It may get louder, but does it go to eleven?

A fair criticism. Consider: what keyboard do you think they’re using to type all those thorns? Are they putting in the Unicode for it each time? Copy pasting it? I’d be willing to bet that they’re using an Icelandic keyboard, and then they’re just ignoring the fact that they are using it wrong. There is only one language on earth that still uses the thorn, and that language doesn’t use it voiced. So no, I maintain that they are using it wrong, objectively, because the only living language that does still use it doesn’t use it that way. It irks me in the same way that I am incensed by stupid Americans pronouncing Central American or Chinese names containing the letter “x” as if it’s in the word “mix”. If it’s from Mayan or related languages, or in Chinese, that shit is pronounced “sh”. It’s just offensive, as someone who studies languages, to see these graphemes being tortured.

Can jou imagine if someone just kept insisting on tjping in Englisj, but tjej replaced everj instance of “h” witj “j”, because “tjat’s jow it is in Spanisj”, but tjen tjej would ALSO use “j” instead of “y”, because “tjat’s jow it’s used in Icelandic”, even wjen tjose letters aren’t being used to represent tjose sounds?

Wouldn’t jou tjink tjat person was a bit of a prick, and probablj just doing it to grab attention, and, oj jeaj, definitivelj wrong?

Indeed. There was a time period when people decided that they didn’t need to make the distinction anymore, then they started using “th” entirely. However, my issue is that, as someone who reads both old English and old Norse texts regularly, in both of these languages the eth represents voiced, the thorn voiceless. It churns my guts every time I see them torturing the thorn like that, and so I downvote.

Indeed. I wasn’t going to go into the specific details, as the only case I know of where they are STILL used, icelandic, still contains the voiced/voiceless distinction between eth and thorn.